Is war a higher calling than raising children?

Wednesday

Mar 26, 2008 at 2:00 AM

Here's how Michael Eichenseer ("Rosie can rivet, and shoot a gun, too," My View, March 17) can get all his answers about why women aren't in military service and combat. All he has to do is rewrite his piece — as impassioned as he did — but substitute "football player" for "soldier" and "male-dominated sports" for "combat."

Here's how Michael Eichenseer ("Rosie can rivet, and shoot a gun, too," My View, March 17) can get all his answers about why women aren't in military service and combat. All he has to do is rewrite his piece — as impassioned as he did — but substitute "football player" for "soldier" and "male-dominated sports" for "combat."

Women aren't hard-wired with the testosterone chip — that kicker that makes men more aggressive, sometimes bar room brawlers, fiercely competitive, often involved in physically violent sports like football and boxing, and more.

To me, a 75-year-old woman, sports have always seemed like mini-wars.

And there is nothing in me that I could ever connect with to help me pull the trigger of a machine gun. Nothing. No way could I be convinced to go into a war to kill people. And I'm sure I'm not the only woman (or man) who feels this way. Women are into birth, not death. Women are into avoiding violence, not participating in it.

As for the demeaning comment about women — "Men defend their country, women change diapers. Men are cannon fodder, women are special or inadequate" — the obvious implication is that defending one's country is a higher goal than taking care of one's children.